On Tue, 2002-07-09 at 03:47, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > An aside: I was thinking about this some, from the PoV of using our > > existing type system to handle this (as you might remember, this is an > > inclination I've had for quite a while). I think that most things line > > up fairly well to allow this (and having transaction-enabled features > > may require it), but do notice that the SQL feature of allowing a > > different character set for every column *name* does not map > > particularly well to our underlying structures. > > I've been think this for a while too. What about collation? If we add > new chaset A and B, and each has 10 collations then we are going to > have 20 new types? That seems overkill to me.
Can't we do all collating in unicode and convert charsets A and B to and from it ? I would even reccommend going a step further and storing all 'national' character sets in unicode. -------------- Hannu ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
